August 06, 2010

Cobell Plaintiffs Debate Their Next Step

In what has become a monthly ritual, Congress has blown through another deadline in a $3.4 billion proposed settlement for American Indians and left plaintiffs to consider their options.

Dennis Gingold, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, including lead plaintiff Elouise Cobell of Montana, said in an interview today that he and his clients are considering whether to give Congress more time to act. The proposed settlement needs congressional authorization, and lawyers in the case have set at least six deadlines for that to happen since they came to terms in December 2009.

“We have to have some discussions with the administration about how this is going to proceed going forward, and we haven’t done that,” said Gingold (pictured above), a Washington solo practitioner. “If it looks like we actually have a sincere and honest commitment to get it done it September, then it would be foolish not to extend” the deadline, he said.

The plaintiffs’ alternative would be to abandon the settlement and either negotiate a new one or return to litigation against the government.

The House of Representatives has twice given its approval to the settlement, including the authorization in broader spending bills, but the settlement has gotten caught up in the Senate. Lawmakers need to find other savings in the federal budget to satisfy self-imposed debt rules, and some Republicans want to impose a $50 million cap on attorney fees.

With the annual August congressional recess beginning today, lawmakers will not have another chance to act until mid-September.

In the meantime, lawyers will need to appear for at least one status conference before U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan of the District of Columbia. The conference is scheduled to be held in chambers on Aug. 17. The U.S. Justice and Interior departments are both parties to the proposed settlement, which will still need Hogan’s approval if and after Congress acts.

Democratic and Republican lawmakers have pointed fingers at each other to explain Congress’ inaction. Gingold said both parties, in addition to the White House, deserve blame because, except for a few lawmakers, they have all made American Indians a low priority.

Gingold said Obama administration officials need to lobby Congress harder. “Why bother doing something that is this much of a landmark if you’re not willing to do what it takes to get it done?” he said.

Comments

The attorneys and Cobell made this agreement without ever including any tribal leaders in the negotiations. Granted this isn't the way Class Action lawsuits are normally dealt with however, this is the way we do things in Indian Country. If they would have asked they would have found out that the Agreement would not be supported by many of us who they are suppose to represent. It is not the landmark case the attorneys claim but one that is a miscarriage of justice in the realm of the original Dawes Act it claims to finally settle. By changing the intent of the suit from an Accounting to mismanagement of our lands has many of us wanting the Senate to continue in the direction it has taken.

When side by side with 'Pigford' any reasonable person can infer they are different and their differences have no real basis in law. One group has no soveriegn status [hence no Govt fiduciary trust responsibilities] and the other does! Still the non-sovereigns are getting $50K EACH-the soveriegns get maybe $1500...this is a further run on Native resources. They need to renegotiate more in line with the much stated opposition but they remain rigid
and blame the Senate-they've done nothing to 'move to the middle' as implored time/ again..why cobell, gingold???

They are pointing fingers at each other because both parties are equally guilty of having deep pockets with the Native Americans money through out the years! Passed down from one generation to the next! and also they just want to stonewall and go on their little vacations till September, which will give them yet another round of bickering and then another deadline will be set and so the story goes!

Your Blog implies that Congress has missed "a deadline." Neither the Plaintiffs or the Administration get to set "deadlines" for Congress. These deadlines are in place to keep the case stayed in District Court. A little coordination with Congress BEFORE signing the settlement agreement might have produced some better results.